Compounds of faciō vary between passives in -fīō and passives in -ficior. The distinction? Check the vowel a (faciō) in the compound. In the rare case that this is retain in the compound, then –fīō is also retained.
benefaciō, benefacere, benefēcī, benefactum (in place of the expected beneficio/ficere/fēcī/fectum, and hence the English ‘benefaction’ but also ‘infection.’)
benefīō, benefierī, benefactus sum
Several of the faciō compounds that feature -ficiō/-ficior forms will also feature passive -fīō forms, with separate meanings.
In place of a passive form [facior], Latin makes use of fīō, fierī, factus sum.
Note that both the ī and the ō are long, which distinguishes fīō from similar –iō verbs, where the i is short
Note that A&G get very prescriptive about the proper forms of fīō, and whereas they distinguish between those forms which appear in “good” prose from those which appear in (“bad”?) prose, we will make no such distinction here.
photo credit: Wiktionary
Note a few variations: the long vowel on ī is present in present in most places, but absent in fit, fierem, and fierī.
We’ve been discussing how verbs that demand and decree take a substantive clause of purpose (ut/nē + subjunctive). Allen and Greenough no sooner outline the phenomenon of these purpose clauses than they start demonstrating common exceptions.
Iubeō (order) and vetō (forbid) are more likely to take the infinitive + accusative.
He orders them to send more loaves: aliōs panēs eōs ferre iubet.
She forbids them from approaching the temple: aedem adire vetat.
Where the verb is passive, the verb remains infinitive, but the subject accusative becomes nominative:
They are ordered to be present the next day: adesse iubentur postrīdiē.
He was ordered to go into exile: īre in exsilium iussus est.
Simonides was forbidden to sail: Simōnidēs vetitus est nāvigāre.
This construction is most common with these two verbs, but not unheard of with other verbs of commanding.
He orders that a bridge be built: pontem fierī imperat.
Matters at hand warn us to be on our guard so that we don’t perish too soon: rēs praestentēs nōs monet cavēre nē citior pereant.
(careful with that last one — it’s meant to differentiate the two options on the table, but if you read it too quickly it might just conflate them)
This post considers places where the Dative of Agent invades what would normally be constructions suitable to the Ablative of Agent.
With Passive Perfect Participles
With passive verbs, the Dative of Agent is most common with perfect passive participles, especially when these are virtually adjectival.
It has been deliberated and established by me: mihi dēlīberātum et cōnstitūtum est.
This has been provided for by you: tibi haec prōvīsa est.
The lights have made me dizzy: lūcibus cālīgātus sum.
Note that, with the final expression, lūcibus may be either Dative or an Ablative of Instrument (but not an Ablative of Agent, since there is no ā/ab). In this case, assume it’s an Ablative of Instrument, which is altogether more common, especially with something inanimate like ‘lights.’
– With Passive Verb
The Dative of Agent is not unheard of with standard passive verbs, especially with the poets.
He is not seen by anyone: nōn cernitur ūllī.
He was favored by the nymph: Nymphō fovēbātur.
The construction ‘it seems to x‘ is expressed with videor, vidērī, visus + Dative of Agent.
He seemed to me a horse with wings: mihi equis cum ālīs vidēbātur.
It seemed otherwise to the gods: dīs aliter vīsum est.
It seems to me that you are a slob: sordidus mihi vidēris.
According to AG, probāre takes a Dative of Reference, but it’s so regularly attached that it seems like a Dative of Agent. I’m not sure I buy this, but here’s what they mean:
This view was approved by both him and me: haec sententia et illī et mihi probābātur.
This plan was not approved by the majority: hōc cōnsilium plēris nōn probābātur.